Partilha de bens no divórcio por regime (Código Civil): apura a massa partilhável (bens − dívidas conforme o regime) e a quota de cada cônjuge, com torna por desequilíbrio. Marque entra_partilha por bem para sobrepor o default do regime.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| bens | Yes | ||
| nomes | No | ||
| regime | Yes | ||
| dividas | No |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and non-destructive behavior, so the description does not need to restate safety. It adds useful behavioral context: default treatment varies by regime and can be overridden per asset with 'entra_partilha'. No contradiction with annotations.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
Two compact sentences: the first front-loads the purpose and the computation, the second gives a specific override instruction. No filler or repetition.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
The description conveys the core legal calculation and the override mechanism, but the tool has nested objects, no output schema, and zero schema descriptions. It lacks detail on return structure, the meaning of regime variants, and how optional fields affect the calculation, so the agent may need external legal knowledge to invoke it correctly.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
With 0% schema description coverage, the burden is on the description. It gives meaning to 'bens', 'dívidas', 'regime', and the 'entra_partilha' overrides, but does not explain 'nomes' or the many legal attribute flags inside asset/debt items, such as 'oneroso', 'incomunicavel', or 'heranca_doacao'. Partial compensation only.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
The description clearly specifies a unique domain (divorce property division under the Civil Code) and a concrete computation: determining the shared estate and each spouse's share, with an adjustment for imbalance. This distinguishes it from sibling calculation tools without requiring the schema.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
It states the context ('no divórcio') and the legal basis ('por regime (Código Civil)'), and gives an operational instruction for overriding defaults via 'entra_partilha'. It does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusion cases, but the domain context is clear enough among the sibling tools.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.
The 16 calculo_* tools are each tied to a specific legal area and are generally easy to distinguish. However, the platform tools overlap: marketplace bundles discovery, auth, listing, and bug-report flows that also exist in authenticate, connect, toolkit_info, and report_bug.
The calculo_* group is highly consistent and readable. The six platform tools follow a different, more mixed English convention with bare verbs, noun phrases, and snake_case names, so the set as a whole has two naming schemas rather than one.
22 tools is in the heavy 16-25 range and feels excessive for a server titled 'Reajuste de Aluguel'. Some legal calculators are useful in a broader legal-calculation platform, but the title and the actual scope are mismatched.
For a broad Brazilian legal-calculation toolkit, coverage is quite wide: rent, monetary updating, criminal sentencing, FGTS, INSS, labor, and banking calculations are present. Still, there are notable gaps for a general legal surface, such as other INSS benefit calculations or civil compensation estimates, and the rent-adjustment title does not represent the full set.